The Development of Religious Liberty in Connecticut
by
M. Louise Greene, Ph. D.
Part 6 out of 7
the bonus to be paid into the treasury. An act of incorporation,
rather than a petition, was, they claimed, the way established by
custom of granting bank charters. The same session of the legislature
originated bills giving $20,000 to the Medical Institution of Yale
College, and one of the same amount to the Bishop's Fund, "in
conformity to the offer of the petitioners for the Phonix Bank, and
out of the first moneys received from it as a bonus." The bill for
the medical school was passed unanimously by the House; that for the
Bishop's Fund uniformly voted down. [v] The Episcopalians, to whom the
Republicans were quick to offer their sympathy, asserted that by the
"grant to Yale the legislature had _committed themselves in good
faith_ to make the grant to the two other corporations connected
with it in the same petition." [w] Stripped of formal and courteous
wording, the petition, both in letter and in spirit, had offered its
conditions to all, if accepted by one; or, if refused at all, the
opportunity to divert the money from all three recipients to some
other and quite different use which should be approved by the
legislature.
The further bad faith of both branches of the Assembly increased the
enmity of the Episcopalians. In the spring of 1815, they petitioned
for their first installment of $10,000. They were told that the
treasury was empty, and that war time was no time to attend to such
matters. In the fall, in answer to their second petition, they found
the Lower House still hostile; the majority of the Council, including
the governor, in their favor, until the discussion came up, when the
Council, with one exception, sided with the House. The explanation of
the change appeared to the Episcopalians to be due to the fact that
during the session the Medical School had petitioned for the balance
of the $30,000, and seemed likely to receive it at the spring
meeting. This was too much for the Episcopalians, and thereafter the
Democrats claimed nine tenths of their vote. The sect was estimated in
1816 to contain from one eleventh to one thirteenth of the
population. The Democratic-Republicans had won over discontented
radicals, a majority of the dissatisfied dissenters, a few
conservatives, and now the indignant Episcopalians. Their political
hopes rose higher, but the War of 1812-1814 interfered, substituting
national interests for local ones, yet all the while adding recruits
to the Republican ranks, so that at its close there was a strong
party. There was also a Federal faction in process of
disintegration. The result was that when the constitutional reform
movement again became the issue of the day, though supported by the
Republicans, the question at issue soon drew to itself a new political
combine which under various forms kept the name of the Toleration
Party, and which eventually won the victory for religious freedom and
disestablishment.
FOOTNOTES:
[a] This party, called for short "Republican," stood for the
principles known as "democratic,"--the appellation of the party itself
since 1828. This was the school of Jefferson.
[b] There were men of mark among the Anti-Federalist leaders, such as
William Williams of Lebanon, a signer of the Declaration, Gen. James
Wadsworth of Durham, and Gen. Erastus Wolcott of East Windsor,--these
three were members of the Council; Dr. Benjamin Gale of Killingworth,
Joseph Hopkins, Esq., of Waterbury, Col. Peter Bulkley of Colchester,
Col. William Worthington of Saybrook, and Capt. Abraham Granger of
Suffield. At the ratification of the Constitntution the Tote stood 128
to 40. Afterwards for about ten years, in the conduct of state
politics, there was little friction, for in local matters the
Anti-Federalists were generally conservatives."
[c] Two deputies were allowed every town rated at $60,000. In 1785
Oliver Ellsworth had prepared a bill limiting towns of L20,000 or
under to one deputy. It passed the Senate, but was defeated in the
House.--_The Constitution of Connecticut_, 1901, State Series,
p. 105.
[d] In his pamphlet Dr. Gale advises that each town nominate one man,
and from the nominations in each county, the General Assembly elect
two, four or six delegates from each county to meet and frame a new
constitution, since "any legislature is too numerous a body, and too
unskilled in the science of government to properly perform such a
task" (p. 29).--J. Hammond Trumbull, _Hist. Notes on the
Constitution of Conn._, p. 17, and Wolcott's Manuscript in
_Mass. Hist. Soc. Col._ vol. iv.
[e] A similar method of election applied to the representatives in
Congress. Eighteen names were voted on in May for nomination, of which
the seven highest were listed for election in September.
[f] Bishop Seabury's church, St. James of New London, had neglected to
ohserve President Washington's proclamation of a national thanksgiving
on February 19, 1795, which fell in Lent. This roused some antagonism,
and was made the subject of a sharp and rather censorious newspaper
attack upon the Episcopalians. At the same time a few Federal
Congregationalists were further stirred by Bishop Seabury's signature,
viz. "Samuel, Bishop of Connecticut and Rhode Island," to a
proclamation that the prelate had issued, urging a contribution in
behalf of the Algerine captives. This signature was regarded as a
"pompous expression of priestly pride." Governor Huntington was a
personal friend of Bishop Seabury. Moreover, at this particular time,
the congregation to which the Governor belonged in Norwich was
worshiping in the Episcopal church during the rebuilding of their own
meeting-house, which had been destroyed by fire. The Governor had
previously been approached with a suggestion that the fasts and feasts
of the Congregationalists and Episcopalians should be made to
coincide, or at least that the annual fast day should not be appointed
for any time between Easter Week and Trinity Sunday, and that the
public thanksgivings, when occasion required them, should, if
possible, not be appointed during Lent. In 1795, the annual fast day
would have fallen upon the Thursday in Holy Week. In order to avoid
laying any stress upon the sanctity of certain days of the week, and
because Governor Huntington wished to turn the public mind away from
the petty controversy, he appointed the fast day on Good Friday. In
1796, the annual fast fell in the Lenten season. In 1797, in order to
avoid having the fast interfere with the regular sessions of the
County Courts, and at the same time to avoid its falling in Easter
week, Governor Trumbull appointed it again on Good Friday. The
arrangement was accepted with satisfaction by the Episcopalians and
with no objections from the Congregationalists, and thereafter it
became the custom. (Bishop Seabury had been elected to the bishopric
of Rhode Island in 1790.)--William DeLoss Love, Jr., _Fasts and
Thanksgivings of New England_, pp. 346-361.
[g] Early in his career he had written a versification of the Psalms,
in 1788 his _Conquest of Canaan_, and later _Triumph of
Infidelity_. President Dwight taught the seniors rhetoric, logic,
ethics, and metaphysics, and the graduate students in theology. In
1805 he was appointed to the professorship of the latter study.
[h] Dr. Dwight's _Theology Explained_ was not published until
1818, after his death, and his _Travels_ not until 1821-22.
[i] Except among the backwoodsmen of Kentucky in 1799-1803.
[j] The Society was granted a charter in 1802. In 1797 interest in the
missions was intensified by the free distribution of seventeen hundred
copies of the report of missionary work in England and America.
[k] The Rev. Jedidiah Champion of Lifcchfield, an ardent Federalist,
on the Sunday following the news of the election of Adams and
Jefferson, prayed fervently for the president-elect, closing with the
words, "0 Lord! wilt Thou bestow upon the Vice-President a double
portion of Thy grace, _for Thou knowest he needs it._" This was
mild, for Jefferson was considered by the New England clergy to be
almost the equal of Napoleon, whom one of them named the "Scourge of
God."
[l] Pierpont Edwards, b. April 8, 1750, graduated at Princeton, 1768,
died April 5, 1826.
Timothy Dwight, b. May 14, 1752, died January 11, 1817.
Aaron Burr, b. February 6, 1756, Vice-President 1801-05, died
September 14, 1836.
Theodore Dwight, b. December 15, 1754, educated for the law under
Pierpont Edwards, and practiced it for a time in New York city with
his cousin, Aaron Burr. He broke the partnership because of difference
in politics, and went to Hartford. He became a member of the
governor's council, 1809-1815; secretary of the Hartford Convention,
1814. He established the _Connecticut Mirror_ in 1809; founded
and conducted the _Albany Daily Advertiser_, 1815-16, and the
_Daily Advocate_, New York, 1816-36. He died June 12, 1846.
[m] The crimes against religion punishable by law were Blasphemy (by
whipping, fine, or imprisonment); Atheism, Polytheism, Unitarianism,
Apostaey (by loss of employment, whether ecclesiastical, civil, or
military, for the first offense).--_Swift's System of Law_, ii,
320, 321.
[n] _Oration delivered in Wallingford on the eleventh of March 1801,
before the Republicans of the State of Connecticut at the General
Thanksgiving for the election of Thomas Jefferson to the Presidency,
and of Aaron Burr to the Vice-Presidency, of the United States of
America 1801._
See the appendix to the Oration for an account of the New Haven
episode.
[o] "Connecticutensis," or David Daggett, also replied in _Three
Letters to Abraham Bishop._ Theodore Dwight's _Oration at New
Haven before the Society of the Cincinnati, July 7, 1801,_ took up
the constitutionality of the charter government.
[p] Later chief justice.
[q] Windham County was steadily Republican after this election.
[r] Major William Judd of Farmington, Jabez H. Tomlinson of Stratford,
Augur Judson of Huntington, Hezekiah Goodrich of Chatham, and
Nathaniel Manning of Windham.
[s] Federalist.
[t] To preserve our institutions and reform public morals, to bring
back the keeping of the Sabbath was our aim ... We tried to do it by
resuscitating and enforcing the law (That was our mistake, but we did
not know it then.) and wherever I went I pushed that thing; Bear up
the laws--execute the laws.... We took hold of it in the Association
at Fairfield, June, 1814, ... recommending among other things a
petition to Congress." (_Autobiography_, i, 268.) At this meeting
originated the famous petition against Sunday mail.
Dr. Beeeher urged a domestic missionary society to build up waste
places in Connecticut. His sermon "Reformation of Morals practicable
and desirable" warned against "profane and profligate men of corrupt
minds and to every good work reprobate."
[u] Judge Church.
[v] The final speech in favor of the bill was made by Nathan Smith, a
lawyer of New Haven. When he had finished his eloquent setting forth
of the benefits and dangers attendant upon passing the bill, there was
an unusual and solemn silence. Dr. Gillett says if the bill had been
promptly put to vote it would probably have been passed, but the
churchlike silence was broken by a shrill voice piping forth,
"Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, what shall we sing?" The laughter which
followed broke the orator's charm and sealed the fate of the bill.
[w] See _Columbian Register_ of June 17, 1820, for a full
account of the Bishop's Fund and the final award of the bonus.
CHAPTER XV
DISESTABLISHMENT
No distinction shall I make between Trojan and Tyrian.
The Federal grip upon Connecticut, one of the last strongholds of that
party, was weakening. Preceding the deflection of the Episcopalians
in Connecticut, there had been throughout New England a strong Federal
opposition to the national government and its commands during the War
of 1812. Such conduct had shattered party prestige, and when its
opposition culminated in the Hartford Convention of 1814, it wrote its
own death-warrant. The Republicans, on the contrary, had dropped local
questions of constitutional reform and religious liberty, preferring
to bend all their energies to the support of the general
government. When as a national party they humbled England and brought
the war to a victorious close, the contrast of their loyalty to state
and national interests steadily drew the popular favor. In the era of
good feeling and prosperity that followed, the great national
political parties dissolved somewhat and crystallized anew. In
Connecticut a similar change took place in local politics. In the
years immediately following the war, the Democratic-Republicans, the
majority of the dissenters, and the dissatisfied among the
Federalists, formed different coalitions that, under the general name
of Toleration, [a] opposed the Standing Order. In 1816 the agitation
for constitutional reform was revived, and after three years resulted
in the overthrow of the Federalists and the triumph of a peaceful
revolution whereby religious liberty was assured.
The conduct of the Federal party, both within and without Connecticut
from 1808 to 1815, was quite as much the real cause of their downfall
in the state as that coalition between clergy and lawyers described by
Dr. Beecher as causing the breakdown of party machinery and its
ultimate ruin. Glancing somewhat hastily at some of the most
far-reaching acts of the Federalists, we find first the Federal
opposition to the embargo that from December 22, 1807, for over a year
paralyzed New England commerce. In February, 1809, John Quincy Adams,
who had recently resigned the Massachusetts senatorship because of his
unpopular support of the embargo, informed President Jefferson that
the measure could no longer be enforced. He assured the President that
the New England Federalist leaders, privily encouraged by England,
were preparing to break that section off from the union of the states
if the embargo were not speedily repealed. This information, whether
accurate or not, so influenced the President and his advisers that the
Non-intercourse Act, applying only to France and England, replaced the
embargo, whose repeal took effect from March 4, 1809. In the following
December, Madison's administration (in the belief that France had
withdrawn her hostile decrees) limited non-intercourse to England
alone, after having vainly urged upon her a repeal of her Orders in
Council. With the embargo lifted, New England commerce revived, and
Connecticut seamen, Connecticut farmers, [b] Connecticut merchants,
together with artisans of all the allied industries that were called
upon in the fitting out of ships and cargoes, enjoyed two years of
prosperity. The period was given over to money-getting, and the
ordinary rules of national or commercial honesty were flung to the
winds. Napoleon sold licenses to British vessels to supply his
famishing soldiers stationed in continental ports, while forged
American and British papers were openly sold in London. So enormous
were the profits of a successful voyage that the possibility of
capture only added zest to the American ventures and contributed not a
little to the daring of the privateers in the years of the war. So
enriched was the state that by May, 1811, Connecticut had so far
recovered from her late financial distress that the "state owed no
debt and every tax was paid," while her exports were: domestic,
$994,216; foreign, $38,138, or a total of $1,032,354.
The ninety days' embargo of 1812, the declaration of war (June
18,1812), and the patrolling of Long Island Sound by a British fleet,
brought such desolation to Connecticut that ships again lay rotting at
the wharves, ropewalks and warehouses were deserted, cargoes were
without carriers, and seamen were either scattered or idling about, a
constant menace to the public peace. National taxes to support a
detested war were laid upon the people at a time when their incomes
were ceasing, and their homes and property were laid bare to a
plundering enemy. "A nation without fleets, without armies, with an
impoverished treasury, with a frontier by sea and land extending many
hundreds of miles, feebly defended" by fortifications old and
neglected, had rushed headlong into war with the strongest nation of
the earth without "counting the cost." Such was the opinion of the
Federalists everywhere and, at first, of the large wing of the
Republican party who preferred peace. The Federalists of Connecticut,
when they saw a small majority sweep the nation into the conflict with
Great Britain, believed the war threatened liberty of speech. They
feared military despotism, when the general government demanded the
control of the militia; and that the war would prostrate" their civil
and religious institutions by increasing taxation and loss of income."
[c] They feared "national dismemberment" when the war measures,
together with the presence of the British fleet blockading the coast,
alternately angered the people almost to rebellion against an
apparently indifferent central government, or drove them into plans
for self-defense. Much of the opposition in New England is in part
accounted for by the rebound towards Federalism which the declaration
of the war caused, and by the belief that the national election of
1812 would be a Federal victory. Though it turned out to be a defeat,
it consolidated and so strengthened that party in New England that
before the close of 1813 all the state executives were Federalists and
were arrayed against the administration. The Republicans kept their
hold upon the minority, partly by the diversion of the capital, thrown
out of the carrying trade, into privateer ventures, war supplies, and
manufactures.
At the beginning of the war, Governor Griswold, of Connecticut, backed
by both houses of the legislature, joined with Governor Strong of
Massachusetts (supported only by the House of Representatives) in a
refusal to place the militia under regular officers of the United
States army. They refused also to allow the quotas called for by
General Dearborn (under the Act of Congress of April 10, 1812), for
the expedition against Canada, to leave the state. These executives
claimed that the troops were not needed to execute the laws of the
United States, to suppress insurrection, or to repel invasion,--the
only three constitutional reasons giving the President the right to
consider himself "commander in chief of the militia of the several
states." [207] By taking such a stand, the state governors assumed to
decide whether a necessity existed that gave the President his
constitutional right to call out the militia. Mr. Henry Cabot Lodge,
in his "Memoir of Governor Strong," exonerates that executive by
pleading his intense convictions of duty, his loyal patriotism, and
his later efficient aid [d] in defending the eastern coast of the
state. Mr. Lodge reminds his reader that the governor's position was
supported by the best lawyers, whom he had been at great pains to
consult concerning state and federal rights, which, at that period,
had not been so carefully examined and discriminated between as
since. The same pleas may be urged for Governors Griswold [e] and
Smith. The Connecticut legislature immediately passed an act for
raising twenty-six hundred men for state defense under state
officers. Governor Griswold's successor, Gov. J. Cotton Smith, when
Decatur was blockaded in the Thames, when the descent upon Saybrook
was made, at the attack upon Stonington, and during those months when
the enemy hovered upon the long exposed coast line, kept a large force
of militia ready for duty. The state supported these troops, for, in
the wrangle over officership, the national government refused the
promised supplies.
The New England Federalists soon found seven great reasons for party
action. They were the uncertain success of the war by land; the great
commercial distress; [f] the possession by the enemy of a large part
of Maine; the publication of the terms upon which England would grant
peace; [g] the proposed legislation in the fall of 1814, providing for
the increase of the United States army by draft or conscription; the
proposed modified form of impressment of sailors; and the bill
allowing army officers to enlist minors and apprentices over eighteen
years of age, with or without consent of parents or guardians. [h]
These measures drove the New England Federalists, at the call of
Massachusetts, to the formation of the Hartford Convention. The
Connecticut legislature approved the sending of delegates by a vote of
153 to 36 opposed. Massachusetts and Rhode Island answered with like
enthusiasm. New Hampshire and Vermont hesitated, but the counties of
Cheshire and Grafton in the former state and of Windham in the latter
sent each a delegate to the convention. Rhode Island sent four
delegates and Massachusetts twelve, of whom George Cabot was elected
president of the convention. Connecticut furnished the secretary of
the convention, and later its historian in Theodore Dwight of
Hartford. She also sent seven other delegates, namely: Chauncey
Goodrich, mayor of Hartford, and from 1814 to 1815 governor of the
state; John Treadwell, ex-governor; James Hillhouse, who had served as
United States representative and senator; Zephaniah Swift, United
States representative and later chief judge of superior court of
Connecticut; Calvin Goddard, United States representative; Nathaniel
Smith, United States representative and later judge of the supreme
court; and Roger Minot Sherman, a distinguished lawyer and member of
the state legislature. All the delegates to the Hartford Convention
were men of high character, and most of them well-known leaders of the
Federal party. The convention lasted for three weeks, and, as its
sessions were conducted with the greatest secrecy, many prejudicial
rumors and surmises arose. The Massachusetts summons had bidden the
delegates convene for measures of safety "not repugnant to our
obligations as members of the Union," and the convention acknowledged
that it found the greatest difficulty in "devising means of defense
against dangers, and of relief from oppressions proceeding from the
act of their own Government without violating constitutional
principles or disappointing the hopes of a suffering and injured
people." The secrecy, the known antagonism to the Administration, the
knowledge of New England's early disbelief in the cohesive power of
the Union, and the convention's demands and resolutions, combined to
give a bad and traitorous reputation to the Hartford Convention that
has never been absolutely cleared away.
As early as 1796, over the signature "Pelham," there had appeared in
the "Hartford Courant" a series of articles written with great ability
and keen foresight as to the difficulties that would arise in making
any impartial legislation for a nation composed of parts having such
diverse economic systems as those of the North and the South. The
articles suggested the development of two nations instead of
one. During the War of 1812, various suggestions had been thrown out
by different newspapers enlarging upon the resources of New England
and hinting at a separate peace with England. There were not a few
who, upon learning of the resolutions of the convention, felt that
"Pelham" was a close adviser of its measures if not one of its
delegates. Public opinion was so wrought up by the assumed disloyalty
of the Hartford Convention that in 1815 it forced the publication of
the convention's brief and non-committal "Journal." From it little
more was learned than that the convention had resolved that the
different states should take measures to protect themselves against
draft by the national government, that New England should be allowed
to defend herself, and for that purpose should have returned to each
of her states a reasonable share of the national taxes to meet the
expense of their arming. In addition, each New England state should
set apart a certain portion of her militia under her governor to give
aid in cases of extremity should she be called upon by the governor of
another state. At the close of the convention, delegates were
appointed to proceed to Washington with these resolutions and also
with six proposed amendments [i] to the national constitution. These
demands and resolves were reinforced by the proposal that should the
Administration refuse to consider the propositions, another convention
should be held in the following summer to consider further action.
When the delegates arrived in Washington with the resolutions, of
which two state legislatures had meantime approved, the news of peace
had been declared. In the general jubilation they saw fit to leave
their message undelivered. For years the taint of rebellion clung to
the Hartford Convention, and forced its secretary, in 1833, to publish
his "History," a defense of its members and their measures. Even this
did not remove the stigma. The delegates had in their own communities
always retained their reputation for high personal character, but
politically they were irretrievably ruined by their participation in
the Hartford gathering. They had dealt their party in their states a
mortal blow, and the Hartford Convention has been well named "the
grave of the Federal party."
However much the members of the convention swathed their sentiments in
expressions of allegiance to the Union, at least until extreme
provocation should force a separation; or however much they declared
their conviction that peace, not war, should be the time chosen for
such a separation, and that, first of all, distinction should be
carefully made between a bad constitution and a bad government, and a
good constitution or government badly administered, there was no doubt
but that they proposed to push nullification to the point of active
resistance within what they considered their legal rights. They had
also proposed a set of amendments which they knew stood no chance of
meeting with approval from any number of the states. Moreover the
Hartford Convention, whatever its intentions, seriously alarmed and
embarrassed the Administration. Because of the consequences of their
policy, its members were culpable in the opinion of all who hold that,
in the distress of war, to hamper one's own government is to lend
assistance to the enemy. [j]
The war at first was not popular, but made friends for itself as it
progressed. Connecticut sailors were among the seamen that England had
impressed, and Connecticut captains had surrendered ships and rich
cargoes at the command of the mistress of the seas. But the naval
triumphs of the first year caught the popular fancy, for "not until
the Guerriere's colors were struck to the Constitution had a British
frigate been humiliated on the ocean." The victories on land were
about equally balanced. The disclosures of English perfidy in
attempting through her secret agents [k] to detach New England from
the Union before war should break out, and during the conflict, by
favoritism to Massachusetts, helped to increase the supporters of the
war policy. Further, the war brought out the latent powers of the
nation, both for defense and for prosperity. The gradual introduction
of machinery since 1800 had enlarged the small manufactories of
Connecticut, and begun the exchange of products between near
localities. But before the War of 1812 no manufacturing in Connecticut
had achieved a notable success. [l] There was invention and skill, [m]
and often profit, in the home market for the coarser products, but
there was a general tendency to prefer imported goods of finer make.
The war cut off such supplies, and the need created a paying demand
and developed an ability to supply it. The political party that
conducted the war to a successful finish developed the policy of
protection of infant industries, and the tariff of 1816 gave birth to
Connecticut as a manufacturing state. The repeal of the obnoxious war
measures, the speedy reduction of the national expenses, and the
promise of prosperity smoothed out lingering resentment. The Federal
party was virtually extinct outside of its last strongholds in New
England and Delaware. In the Era of Good Feeling following the war the
whole people composed one party, with principles neither those of the
original Federal party nor those of the original Republican party, but
a combination of both." [n]
In New England during the War of 1812, as in the Revolution, the
clergy had been the nucleus of the local dominant party, and with its
leaders had been bitter opponents of the "unrighteous war." [208]
Consequently the Congregational clergy shared in the popular
disapproval and condemnation that overtook the Federalists. In
Connecticut, for a time, the Standing Order by its affiliation with
the Federal party prolonged its control. of the state. But the tide
was turning. Dr. Lyman Beecher, Dr. Dwight's able lieutenant, made
vigorous and laudable efforts to uphold the Dwights, the Aaron and
Moses, as it were, of the waning political power. The "Home Missionary
Society," [o] Bible societies, the "Domestic Missionary Society for
the Building up of Waste Places," and the many branches of the
"Society for the Suppression of Vice and Promotion of Good Morals" [p]
did much good among those who welcomed them. Where their results were
simply those of a morality enforced by law, they caused still greater
dissatisfaction with the ruling party. [q] The union of the clergy and
lawyers was not as influential as had been anticipated in the early
days of 1812. Soon after the war the clergy adopted a less vigorous
policy, preferring an attitude of defense against calumny and a
withdrawal from politics. [r]
The elections showed the change in public opinion. At the April
election, 1814, the Federals reelected Governor Smith, while the
Republican candidate, Mr. Edward Boardman, received 1629 votes. The
following year, notwithstanding Governor Smith's reelection, Mr.
Boardman polled 4876 votes, and the Republicans made a gain of twenty
in the House of Representatives, while in the fall nominations for
Assistants, the highest Federal vote was 9008 and that of the
Republicans was 4268. [209]
In January, 1816, "a meeting of citizens from various parts of the
state" was held in New Haven to agree upon a nomination for governor
and lieutenant-governor, which would bind together the Republicans and
such of the Federalists as were opposed to the Standing Order. Oliver
Wolcott and Jonathan Ingersll were unanimously agreed upon. Oliver
Wolcott had been living out of the state for fourteen years, and for
most of that time had not been in politics. His Republican supporters
had had time to forget him as a staunch Federalist, and remembered him
only as a man of parts who had held the secretaryship of the treasury
under Washington and Adams, and who had "opposed the Hartford
Convention; like Washington was a friend to the _Union_, a foe to
rebellion; with mild means resisted bigotry, with a glowing heart
favored toleration." [210] As he had approved the policy of the
general government since the days of Madison, he was pronounced an
available candidate. A good Congregationalist, he would not offend the
Federalists, would be acceptable to the Republicans, and would stand
to the capitalists and farmers as favorable to a protective tariff and
to more equitable taxation within the state. The prestige given him by
the executive abilities of his father and grandfather in the
gubernatorial chair also counted in his favor. The candidate for
lieutenant-governor was Jonathan Ingersoll, a Federalist, an eminent
New Haven lawyer, a prominent Episcopalian, senior warden of Trinity
Church, and chairman of the Bishop's Fund. He had had political
training in the Council, 1792-1798, and had been judge of the Superior
Court, 1798-1801, and again from 1811 to 1816. His nomination was the
price of the Episcopal vote, for "it was deemed expedient by giving
the Episcopalians a fair opportunity to unite with the Republicans, to
attempt to affect such change in the Government as should afford some
prospect of satisfaction to their united demands." [s]
The "Connecticut Herald," indignant at the Assembly's conduct in the
Phoenix Bank affair, left the Federal party and independently
nominated Jonathan Ingersoll for lieutenant-governor instead of the
regular candidate of that party, Chauncey Goodrich. The "American
Mercury," the organ of the American Toleration party, the union of
Republicans, dissenters, and dissatisfied, in order "to produce that
concord and harmony among parties which have too long, and without any
real diversity of interests, been disturbed, and which every honest
man must earnestly desire to see restored," nominated for governor,
Oliver Wolcott; for lieutenant-governor, Jonathan Ingersoll. The
Federal candidate for the executive was Governor John Cotton Smith, up
for reelection. The Tolerationists failed by a few hundred votes to
seat their candidate for the executive, with the result that the
election of 1816 raised to office Governor Smith and
Lieutenant-Governor Ingersoll. Governor Smith received 11,589 votes,
Mr. Wolcott 10,170, while Lieutenant-Governor Ingersoll polled a
majority of 1453 over his opponent, Mr. Calvin Goddard. [t] It was the
first time that a dissenter had held so high an office. The
Federalists might have seized the opportunity to renew their former
friendship with the Episcopalians had it not been for their
stubbornness and for their old fear of Churchmen in political
office. At the October town meetings, the returns from ninety-three
towns gave a Federal vote of 7995 and a Republican of 6315 for
representatives, with a Federal majority of about thirty in the
House. [2ll]
The Federalists, realizing that the Episcopal vote was almost lost to
them, that their domestic policy was in disfavor, and that their
conduct during the war had damaged them and was leading to their
downfall in Connecticut even as in the nation, resolved upon a
desperate measure to conciliate a larger number of the dissenters.
This was the Act of October, 1816, for the Support of Literature and
Religion. Briefly, it divided the balance of the money which the
nation owed Connecticut for expenses during the war, namely $145,000,
among the various denominations. To the Congregationalists it gave in
round numbers, and including the grant to Yale, $68,000; to the
Episcopalians, $20,000; to Methodists, $12,000; and to Baptists,
$18,000; to Quakers, Sandemanians, etc., nothing. [u] The Quakers were
assumed to be satisfied with their recent exemptions from military
duty upon the payment of a small tax; Sandemanians and other
insignificant sects to be conciliated by the act of the preceding
April, which repealed, after a duration of nearly one hundred and
eighty years, the fine of fifty cents for absence from church on
Sunday. The people were at last free, not only to worship as they
chose, but when they chose, or to omit worship. They had yet to obtain
equal privileges for all denominations, and exemption from enforced
support of religion. The passage of the Act for the Support of
Literature and Religion raised, as the Congregationalists ought to
have known it would, a violent protest from every dissenter and from
every political come-outer. Some of the towns in town-meetings opposed
the bill as unnecessary for the support of schools and clergy; as
wasteful, when it would be wiser to create a state fund; and as unduly
favorable to Yale, where the policy was to create an intellectual
class and not to advance learning and literature among the
commonalty. At Andover, February 1, 1817, Episcopalians, Baptists, and
Methodists met together and denounced the act because they disapproved
of the union of Church and State which it encouraged; because of
Yale's tendency to bias religion; because they all approved of the
voluntary support of religion; and because they all scorned such a
political trick as the bill appeared to them, namely, an attempt to
win by their acceptance of the money their apparent approval of the
enforced support of religion. The Baptist societies in different
towns met to condemn the measure on the same grounds, and on the
additional ones that it was unfair to the Quakers, who had no paid
preachers; to the Universalists, because they were numerically still
too small to be of political importance; and indeed to many men,
since, as every man had contributed to the expense of the war, every
man ought to be rewarded proportionally. The Methodists agreed in all
these criticisms, and were no more backward in denouncing a measure
which forced on them money they did not seek, and for a purpose of
which they disapproved. The Methodist Society of Glastonbury were most
outspoken, declaring the law--
incompatible with sound policy and inconsistent with any former
act of the legislature of the state; the ultimate consequence of
which will prove a lasting curse to vital religion, which every
candid and reflecting mind may easily foresee; and we view it as a
very bold and desperate effort to effectuate a union between
Church and State.... We are induced to believe that Pilate and
Herod, and the chief Priests are still against us,... $12,000 to
the contrary notwithstanding. Resolved--
(1) We don't want such reparation for being characterized as an
illiterate set of enthusiasts devoid of character; our clergy a
set of worthless ramblers, unworthy the protection of our civil
laws.
(2) Pity and contempt for the Legislature should be expressed for
bribery.
(3) We believe the money, if received, would be a lasting curse.
(4) The measure was intended for politics, not religion, and was
a species of Tyranny.
(5) We should use our best endeavors to have the money used for
state expenses.
(6) Thanks should be sent to the members of the Legislature who
had opposed the measure.
All Methodists were further angered by the affront put upon them by
the General Assembly, which, in spite of their known determination not
to receive the money, appointed Methodist trustees, of whom a majority
were Federalists, to receive their share of the appropriation. The
trustees accepted the money, defending their action on the ground that
they believed that their claim would become void if they did not draw
the money, and it might then be put to a worse use. But the Methodist
societies did not uphold the trustees, and "regretted the committee
imposed on us by the Legislature of the state." The chairman of the
committee, the Rev. Augustus Bolles, refused to serve, and the
societies rejected the money. [v]
As a result of the unwelcome legislation, the Republicans received the
whole vote of the Methodists for the "Toleration and Reform Ticket" of
1817, which repeated the nominations of the preceding election. The
Episcopalians of course favored the reelection of Lieutenant-Governor
Ingersoll. One small provocation by the Congregationalists of the
First Church of New Haven--the attempt to place the odium of expulsion
upon a member who became an Episcopalian--did not tend to allay
feeling. The Toleration party were sure of the votes of the more
feeble dissenters, whose interests they promised to regard, as well as
of those of the Baptists and of such Federalists as disapproved of the
high-handed policy of the Standing Order. The Tolerationists were also
counting upon a steady increase of recruits from the Federal ranks as
soon as the appreciation of a recent attack by the legislature upon
the judiciary and its danger should become more and more
realized. Many such recruits, convinced of the necessity of
constitutional reform, had gathered at the general meeting of
Republicans held in New Haven in October, 1816, to make up the ticket
for the spring election of 1817. The campaign issue was "whether
freemen shall be tolerated in the free exercise of their religious and
political rights." It was met by the election of Governor Wolcott with
a majority of 600 votes over ex-Governor J. Cotton Smith, and by no
opposition to the reelection of Lieutenant-Governor Ingersoll. [w] At
the same election many minor Republican officials were seated, and the
House went Republican by an assured majority of nearly two to one, the
Senate remaining strongly Federal.
Governor Wolcott's inaugural placed before the Assembly the following
subjects for consideration: (1) A new system of taxation; for, as the
governor pointed out, the capitation tax was equivalent to about
one-sixteenth of the laboring man's income. (2) Judges of the Superior
Court should hold their office during good behavior instead of by
annual appointment by the legislature. (3) There should be a complete
separation of legislative and judicial powers of government. (4)
Rights of conscience and the voluntary support of religion, though if
necessary with "laws providing efficient remedies for enforcing the
voluntary contracts for their [ministers'] support," should be
considered; and (5) Freedom of suffrage. In concluding, the governor
urged that "whenever the public mind appears to be considerably
agitated on these subjects, prudence requires that the legislature
should revise its measures, and by reasonable explanation or
modifications of the law, restore public confidence and tranquillity."
[x]
To consider briefly these various points: Taxes upon mills, machinery,
and manufactures needed to be light in order to secure their continued
existence. The necessities of war-time had created a larger market for
their products, but one that could not be continued after the close of
the war allowed European products to enter free of duty. Nor could
the factories exist if burdened with heavy taxes before the new tariff
measures of 1816 had revived these depressed industries. In
agriculture, taxes upon horses, oxen, stock, dairy products, and
increased areas of tillage handicapped the farmer. Again, the tax upon
fire-places, rather than upon houses, weighed heavily upon the poor
and the moderately well-to-do, who built small and inexpensive houses
with say three fireplaces, while the rich owners of older and more
pretentious dwellings were often rated for fewer. [y] Money was
scarce, rich men rare. So also was great poverty. There was a scanty
living for the majority. Trades were few, wages low. A farm-hand
averaged three shillings a day, paid in provisions. Women of all work
drudged for two shillings and sixpence per week, while a farm overseer
received a salary of seventy dollars a year. The children of people in
average circumstances walked barefoot to church, carrying their shoes
and stockings, which they put on under the shelter of the big tree
nearest to the meeting-house. Their fathers made one Sunday suit last
for years. The wealthy had small incomes, though relatively great. It
was whispered that Pierpont Edwards, the rich and prosperous New Haven
lawyer, had an income from his law practice of two thousand dollars
per year.
Points (2) and (3) in the governor's address were prompted by the
widespread interest created by the action of the legislature in
October, 1815, when it had set aside the conviction, by a special
Superior Court at Middletown, of Peter Lung for murder, on the ground
that the court was irregularly and illegally convened. The chief judge
was Zephaniah Swift of Windham, author of the "System of Connecticut
Laws." [z] Judge Swift appealed to the public [aa] to vindicate his
judicial character from the censure implied by the Assembly's
action. An ardent Federalist, who in the early days of statehood could
see no need of a better constitution than he then insisted Connecticut
possessed through the adoption of her ancient charter, he had long
opposed the ecclesiastical establishment which that charter upheld. In
his defense of the constitution he had maintained that "it ought to be
deemed an inviolable maxim that _when proper courts of law are
constituted, the legislature are divested of all judicial
authority_." [2l2] But when the legislature claimed as
constitutional the right to call to account any court, magistrate, or
other officer for misdemeanor or mal-administration, [ab] Judge Swift
admitted the lack of "a written constitution." He further argued that
the one "made up of usages and customs, had always been understood to
contain certain fundamental axioms which were held sacred and
inviolable, and which were the basis on which rested the rights of the
people." Of these self-evident principles one was that the three
branches of government--the executive, legislative, and judicial--were
coordinate and independent, and that the powers of one should never be
exercised by the other. "It ought to be held as a fundamental axiom,"
the judge declared, "that _the Legislature should never encroach on
the jurisdiction of the Judiciary,_ nor assume the province of
interfering in private rights, nor of overhauling the decisions of the
courts of law." Otherwise, "the legislature would become one great
arbitration that would engulf all the courts of law, [ac] and
_sovereign discretion_ would be 'the only rule of decision,--a
state of things _equally favorable to lawyers and criminals."_
[213]
With respect to the fifth point in the governor's address, the right
of suffrage, the Republicans and their allies demanded its extension
from householders haying real estate rated at $7 (40s.), or personal
estate of $134 (L40), to "men who pay small taxes, work on highways,
or do service in the militia."
In the fall of 1817, the reform party had forced the repeal of the
obnoxious Stand-Up Law, and it demanded that other restrictive
measures should be annulled. So bitter was the Federal antagonism in
the Council that during all the spring session of 1817, the
Tolerationists loudly complained that every reform measure proposed in
the House was lost in the Federal Senate. The committees to which
parts of the governor's speech had been referred for consideration did
little. That on taxation made a report in the fall recommending that a
careful investigation of conditions and resources should be made,
because, as capital sought investment, in banks, manufacturing, and
various commercial enterprises unknown to the earlier generations,
[ad] the fairness of the old system of taxation was lapsing. The mixed
committee, including several Tolerationists and having an Episcopal
chairman, that was to report upon the religious situation, gave no
encouragement to dissenters. The spring session allowed one barren act
to pass, the "Act to secure equal rights, powers, and privileges to
Christians of all denominations in this state." It enacted that
henceforth certificates should be lodged with the _town clerk,_
and permitted a come-outer to return to the society from which he had
separated. In the following spring, when an attempt was made to pass a
bill to supersede this act, it was maintained that the law of 1817
"did not effect the object or answer the desire of the aggrieved
party," for it retained the certificate clause and continued to deny
to dissenters the measure of religious liberty freely accorded to the
Established churches.
The Tolerationists were determined to carry the elections of 1818. In
the fall elections of 1817, they again had a majority of nearly two to
one in the House, and consequently the struggle was for the control of
the Senate. At the fall meetings, they placed in nomination their
candidates for senators, and all through the winter they agitated in
town meetings and in every other way the discussion of their
"Constitution and Reform Ticket." Party pamphlets were scattered
throughout the state. One of these, the most in favor, was "The
Politics of Connecticut: by a Federal Republican" (George H. Richards
of New London). At the spring elections of 1818, the Constitution and
Reform Ticket carried the day, seating the reflected governor and
lieutenant-governor, eight anti-Federal senators, and preserving the
anti-Federal majority in the House. The political revolution was
complete, and the preliminary steps towards the construction of a new
constitution were at once begun. [ae]
The governor's inaugural address specified the main task before the
Assembly in the following words:--
As a portion of the people have expressed a desire that the form
of civil government in this State should be revised, this highly
interesting subject will probably engage your [the Assembly's]
deliberations.... Considered merely as an instrument denning the
powers and duties of magistrates and rulers, the Charter may
justly be considered as unprovisional and imperfect. Yet it ought
to be recollected that what is now its greatest defect was
formerly a pre-eminent advantage, it being then highly important
to the people to acquire the greatest latitude of authority with
an exemption from British influence and control.
If I correctly comprehend the wishes which have been expressed by
a portion of our fellow citizens, they are now desirous, as the
sources of apprehension from external causes are at present
happily closed, that the Legislative, Executive and Judicial
authorities of their own government may be more precisely denned
and limited, and the rights of the people declared and
acknowledged. It is your province to dispose of this important
subject in such manner as will best promote general satisfaction
and tranquillity.
The House appointed a select committee of five to report upon the
revision of the form of civil government. The Council appointed
Hon. Elijah Boardman (Federalist) and Hon. William Bristol
(Tolerationist) to act as joint committee with several gentlemen
selected by the House. The joint committee reported that "the present
was a period peculiarly auspicious for carrying into effect the wishes
of our fellow-citizens,--the general desire for a revision and
reformation of the structure of our civil government and the
establishment of a Constitutional Compact" and "that the organization
of the different branches of government, the separation of their
powers,the tenure of office, the elective franchise, liberty of speech
and of the press, freedom of conscience, trial by jury, rights which
relate to these deeply interesting subjects, ought not to be suffered
to rest on the frail foundation of legislative will." [214]
Immediately, the House passed a bill requiring the freemen of the
towns to assemble in town meeting on the following Fourth of July "to
elect by ballot as many delegates as said towns now choose
representatives to the General Assembly," said delegates to meet in
constitutional convention at Hartford on the fourth Wednesday of the
following August (Aug. 26) for "the formation of a Constitution of
Civil Government for the people of this state." The bill further
declared that the constitution when "ratified by such majority of the
said qualified voters, convened as aforesaid, as shall be directed by
said convention, shall be and remain the Supreme Law of this State."
An attempt was made to substitute "one delegate" for "as many
delegates" as the towns sent. Upon the question in the convention, as
to what majority should be required for ratification, there was
considerable diversity of opinion. "Two-thirds of the whole number of
_towns"_ was suggested, but was opposed on the ground that
"two-thirds of the whole number of the _towns_ might not contain
one-fourth of the people." _"Three-fifths_ of the legal voters of
the state" was also suggested. In the final decision, the simple
"majority of the freemen" was accepted. Had this not been the case,
the constitution would have failed of ratification, for, as Burlington
made no returns, the vote stood 59 out of 120 towns for ratification,
with 13,918 yeas to 12,364 nays, giving a majority of but 1554.
Several causes tended to bring about an eager, an amiable, or tolerant
support of the work of the convention. Eepublicans and Tolerationists
hoped for sweeping reforms. The Federalists were divided. Many there
were who believed it dangerous for the state to continue destitute of
fundamental laws defining and limiting the powers of the legislature,
and to such as these the need of a bill of rights, and of the
separation of the powers of the government, was immediate and
imperative. The influential faction of the New Haven Federalists were
moved to modify any opposition existing among them by the proposed
change to annual sessions of the legislature with alternate sittings
in the two capitals. There were still other Federalists who accepted
the proposed change in government as inevitable, and who wisely
forebore to block it, preferring to use all their influence toward
saving as much as possible of the old institutions under new
forms. And in this resolve they were encouraged by the high character
of the men that all parties chose as delegates to the constitutional
convention.
The convention met August 26,1818, at Hartford. Governor Wolcott, one
of the delegates from Litchfield, was elected president, and Mr.
James Lanman, secretary. Mr. Pierpont Edwards was chosen chairman of a
committee of three from each county to draft a constitution. The
estimated strength of the parties was one hundred and five Republicans
to ninety-five Federalists, and, of the drafting committee, five
members belonged to the political minority. [af] An idea of the
character of the men chosen for this important task of framing a new
constitution is gained from a glance at some of the names. To begin
with, over thirty-nine of the delegates to the convention either were
Yale alumni or held its honorary degrees, and half of the drafting
committee were her graduates. Ex-Governor Treadwell and Alexander
Wolcott led the opposing parties, while their able seconds in command
were General Nathaniel Terry of Hartford and Pierpont Edwards of New
Haven. The latter still held the office of judge of the United States
District Court, to which Jefferson had appointed him. Among the
delegates, there were Mr. Amasa Learned, formerly representative in
Congress, the ex-chief-judges Jesse Root and Stephen Mix Mitchell,
Aaron Austin, a member of the Council for over twenty years until the
party elections of 1818 unseated him, ex-Governor John Treadwell, and
Lemuel Sanford,--all of whom had been delegates to the convention of
1788, called to ratify the constitution of the United States. Five
members of the drafting committee were state senators, namely:
Messrs. William Bristol, Sylvester Wells, James Lanman, Dr. John
S. Peters of Hebron, and Peter Webb of Windham. Five others,
Messrs. Elisha Phelps, Gideon Tomlinson, James Stevens, Orange Merwin,
and Daniel Burrows were afterwards elected to that office, while
Gideon Tomlinson and John S. Peters became in turn governors of the
state. James Lanman, Nathan Smith (a member also of the committee),
and Tomlinson entered the national Senate. Among the delegates, there
were nearly a dozen well-known physicians, most of them to be found
among the Tolerationists. Messrs. Webb, Christopher Manwaring of New
London, Gideon Tomlinson of Fairfield, and General Joshua King of
Ridgefield, together with Joshua Stow of Middletown (also on the
drafting committee), had been for years the warhorses of the
democracy, loyal followers of their leader Alexander Wolcott, who had
been the Republican state manager from 1800 to 1817.
The method of procedure in the convention was to report from time to
time a portion of the draft of the constitution, of which each article
was considered section by section, discussed, and amended. After each
of the several sections had been so considered, the whole article was
opened to amendment before the vote upon its acceptance was
taken. When all articles had been approved, the constitution was
printed as so far accepted, and was again submitted to revision and
amendment before receiving the final approval of the convention.
While the constitutional convention was in session, the Baptists and
Methodists resolved that no constitution of civil government should
receive their approbation and support unless it contained a provision
that should secure the full and complete enjoyment of religious
liberty. [2l5] And it was known that the Episcopalians were ready to
second such resolutions. These expressions of opinion were of weight
as foreshadowing the kind of reception that many of the towns where
the dissenters were in the ascendant would accord any constitution
sent to them for ratification.
In the convention both the old Federal leader and the old Democratic
chief objected to the incorporation in the constitution of a bill of
rights. Governor Treadwell opposed it on the ground that such
_"unalterable"_ regulations were unnecessary where, as in a
republic, all power was vested in the people. Alexander Wolcott
objected that such a "bill would circumscribe the powers of the
General Assembly" and also because of his disapproval of some of its
clauses. [216] When the draft of fourth section was under discussion,
namely that "No preference shall be given by law to any religious sect
or mode of worship," the Kev. Asahel Morse, a Baptist minister,
offered the substitute,--
That rights of conscience are inalienable, that all persons have a
natural right to worship Almighty God according to their own
consciences; and no person shall be compelled to attend any place
of worship, or contribute to the support of any minister, contrary
to his own choice.
The substitute was rejected, and after some discussion, the wording of
the section was changed by substituting "Christian" in place of
"religious" and this change retained in the final revision. [ag]
The seventh article, "Of Religion," was the subject of a long and
earnest debate.
Sec. 1. It being the right and duty of all men to worship the
Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe, in
the mode most consistent with the dictates of their own
consciences; no person shall be compelled to join or support, nor
by law be classed with or associated to any congregation, church
or religious association. And each and every society or
denomination of Christians in this State, shall have and enjoy the
same and equal powers, rights and privileges; and shall have power
and authority to support and maintain the Ministers or Teachers of
their respective denominations, and to build and repair houses for
public worship, by a tax on the members of the respective
societies only, or in any other manner.
Sec. 2. If any person shall choose to separate himself from the
society or denomination of Christians to which he may belong, and
shall leave written notice thereof with the Clerk of such society
he shall thereupon be no longer liable for any future expenses,
which may be incurred by said society.
The Federalists contested its passage at every point, and succeeded in
modifying the first draft in important particulars, but could not
prevent complete severance of Church and State, nor the constitutional
guarantee to all denominations of religious liberty and perfect
equality before the law. To the first clause as reported--"It being
the right and _duty_ of all men to worship the Supreme Being, the
Great Creator and Preserver of the Universe, in the mode most
consistent with the dictates of their consciences"--Governor Treadwell
objected that "Conscience may be perverted, and man may think it his
duty to worship his Creator by image, or as the Greeks and Romans did;
and though he would _tolerate_ all modes of worship, he would not
recognize it in the Constitution, as the _duty_ of a person to
worship as the heathen do." Mr. Tomlinson afterwards moved to amend
the clause to its present shape, "The duty of all men to
worship... and their right to render that worship." Governor Treadwell
objected that the same clause went "to dissolve all ecclesiastical
societies in this State. That was probably its intent as
Messrs. Joshua Stow and Gideon Tomlinson had drafted it. The former
answered all objections by asserting that "if this section is altered
_in any way_, it will curtail the great principles for which we
contend." [ah]
The first section was finally adopted by a vote of 103 to 86, while a
motion to strike out the second section was rejected by 105 to 84. On
its final revision it read:--
Sec. 1. It being the duty of all men to worship the Supreme Being,
the Great Creator and Preserver of the Universe, and their right
to render that worship in the mode most consistent with the
dictates of their consciences; no person shall, by law, be
compelled to join or support, nor be classed with, or associated
to, any congregation, church, or religious association. But every
person now belonging to such congregation, church, or religious
association, shall remain a member thereof, until he shall have
separated himself therefrom, in the manner hereinafter
provided. And each and every society or denomination of
Christians, in this state, shall have and enjoy the same and equal
powers, rights and privileges; and shall have power and authority
to support and maintain the ministers or teachers of their
respective denominations, and to build and repair houses for
public worship, by a tax on the members of any such society only,
to be laid by a major vote of the legal voters assembled at any
such society meeting, warned and held according to law, or in any
other manner. [ai]
During the last revision of the constitution Mr. Terry had offered the
two amendments that continue the old ecclesiastical societies as
corporate bodies. [217]
The draft of the whole constitution was read through for the last time
as amended and ready for acceptance or rejection, and put to vote on
September 15, 1818. It was passed by 134 yeas to 61 nays. The
constitution then went before the people for their consideration [aj]
and ratification. For a while its fate seemed doubtful; but by the
loyalty of the Federal members of the convention and their efforts in
their own districts the whole state gave a majority for
ratification. The southern counties, with a vote of 11,181, gave a
majority for ratification of 2843; the northern counties, with a vote
of 15,101, gave a majority _against_ ratification of 1189. [218]
The Toleration party as such had triumphed, and they felt that they
had won all they had promised the people, for they had secured "the
same and equal powers, rights and privileges to all denominations of
Christians." They had also cleared the way for a broader suffrage and
for the proper election laws to guarantee it. At the last two
elections the Republicans in the Toleration party had carefully
separated state and national issues, and had in large measure forborne
from criticism of the partisan government, insisting that the people's
decision at the polls would give them--the people--rather than any
political party, the power to correct existing abuses. The Republicans
also insisted that the Tolerationists, no matter what their previous
party affiliation, would with one accord obey the behests of the
sovereign people. But when the constitution was an assured fact the
Republicans felt that the Federalist influence had dominated the
convention, and the Federalists that altogether too much had been
accorded to the radical party. Nevertheless it was the loyalty of the
Federal members of the convention that won the small majority for the
Tolerationists and for the new constitution, even if that loyalty was
founded upon the belief, held by many, that the choice of evils lay in
voting for the new regime.
The constitution of 1818 was modeled on the old charter, and retained
much that was useful in the earlier instrument. The more important
changes were: (1) The clearer definition and better distribution of
the powers of government. (2) Rights of suffrage were established
upon personal qualifications, and election laws were guaranteed to be
so modified that voting should be convenient and expeditious, and its
returns correct. (3) The courts were reorganized, and the number of
judges was reduced nearly one half, while the terms of those in higher
courts were made to depend upon an age limit (that of seventy years),
efficiency, and good behavior. Their removal could be only upon
impeachment or upon the request of at least two thirds of the members
of each house. Judges of the lower courts, justices of the peace, were
still to be appointed annually by the legislature, and to it the
appointment of the sheriffs was transferred. [ak] (4) Amendments to
the constitution were provided for. (5) Annual elections and annual
sessions of the legislature, alternating between Hartford and New
Haven, were arranged for, and by this one change alone the state was
saved a yearly expense estimated at $14,000, a large sum in those
days. (6) The governor [al] was given the veto power, although a
simple majority of the legislature could override it. (7) The salaries
of the governor, lieutenant-governor, senators, and representatives
were fixed by statute, and were not alterable to affect the incumbent
during his term of office. (8) And finally, _the union of Church and
State was dissolved_, and all religious bodies were placed upon a
basis of voluntary support.
Among the minor changes, the law that before the constitution of 1818
had conferred the right of marrying people upon the located ministers
and magistrates only, thereby practically excluding Baptist, Methodist
and Universalist clergy, now extended it to these latter. While
formerly the only literary institution favored was Yale College,
Trinity College, despite a strong opposition, was soon given its
charter, and one was granted later to the Methodists for Wesleyan
College at Middletown. Moreover, the government appropriated to both
institutions a small grant. The teaching of the catechism, previously
enforced by law in every school, became optional. Soon a normal
school, free to all within the state, was opened. The support of
religion was left wholly to voluntary contributions. [am] The
political influence of the Congregational clergy was gone. "The lower
magistracy was distributed as equally as possible among the various
political and religious interests," and the higher courts were
composed of judges of different political opinions.
The battle for religious liberty was won, Church and State divorced,
politics and religion torn asunder. The day of complete religious
liberty had daw'ned in Connecticut, and in a few years the strongest
supporters of the old system would acknowledge the superiority of the
new. As the "old order changed, yielding place to new," many were
doubtful, many were fearful, and many there were who in after years,
as they looked backward, would have expressed themselves in the frank
words of one of their noblest leaders: [an] "For several days, I
suffered what no tongue can tell _for the best thing that ever
happened to the State of Connecticut."_
FOOTNOTES:
[a] Party names were "American," "American and Toleration,"
"Toleration and Reform."
[b] Three fourths of Connecticut's exports were products of
agriculture.
[c] "All institutions, civil, literary and ecclesiastical, felt the
pressure, and seemed as if they must he crushed. Our schools, churches
and government even, in the universal impoverishment, were failing and
the very foundations were shaken, when God interposed and took off the
pressure."--Lyman Beecher, _Autobiography_, i, 266.
[d] The Massachusetts militia were placed under General Dearborn,
August 5, 1812.
[e] Governor Griswold died Octoher, 1812, and was succeeded in office
by Lieutenant-Governor John Cotton Smith.
[f] The direct tax laid July 22-24,1813, by the national government,
was apportioned in September, as follows: To Massachusetts,
$316,270.71; to Rhode Island, $34,702.18; and to Connecticut,
$118,167.71, divided as follows (which shows the relative wealth of
the different sections of the state), Litchfield, $19,065.72;
Fairfield, $18,810.50; New Haven, $16,723.10; Hartford, $19,608.02;
New London, $13,392.04; Middlesex, $9,064.20; Windham, $14,524.38; and
Tolland, $6,984.69. Duties were levied upon refined sugar, carriages,
upon licenses to distilleries, auction sales of merchandise and
vessels, upon retailers of wine, spirits, and foreign merchandise;
while a stamp tax was placed upon notes and bills of exchange.--See
_Niles Register_, v, 17; _Schouler_, ii, 380. The tax in
1815 was $236,335.41.--_Niles_, vii, 348.
[g] Briefly, an independent Indian nation between Canada and the
United States; no fleets or military posts on the Great Lakes, and no
renunciation of the English rights of search and impressment.
[h] The April (1815) session of the Connecticut legislature passed an
"Act to secure the rights of parents, masters and guardians." It
declared the proposed legislation in Congress contrary to the spirit
of the Constitution of the United States, and an unauthorized
interference with state rights. It commanded all state judges to
discharge on habeas corpus all minors enlisted without consent of
parents or guardians, and it enacted a fine, not to exceed five
hundred dollars, upon any one found guilty of enlisting a minor
against the consent of his guardian, and a fine of one hundred dollars
for the advertising or publication of enticements to minors to enlist.
[i] "Amendments: (1) Restrictions npon Congress requiring a two thirds
vote in making and declaring war, (2) in laying embargoes, and (3) in
admitting new states. (4) Restriction of the presidential office to
one term without reelection, and with no two successive Presidents
from the same state. (5) Reduction of representation and taxation by
not reckoning the blacks in the slave states. (6) No foreign born
citizen should be eligible to office.
[j] "They advocated nullification and threatened dissolution of the
Union."--J. P. Gordy, _Political History of the United States_,
ii, 299.
[k] The President in March, 1812, sent to Congress the documents for
which he had paid one John Henry $50,000. The latter claimed to be an
agent sent from Canada in 1809 to detach New England Federalists from
their allegiance to the Union. Congress by resolution proclaimed the
validity of the documents. The British minister solemnly denied all
knowledge of them on the part of his government. The American people
believed in their authenticity, which belief was confirmed during the
war by the distinct favor shown for a while to Massachusetts, and by
the hope, openly entertained by England, of separating New England
from New York and the southern states.
[l] Manufactures in Connecticut (abridged from the U. S. marshal's
report in the autumn of 1810, cited in _Niles' Register_, vi,
323-333) were represented by 14 cotton mills, 15 woolen mills. (By
1815 New London county alone had 14 woolen mills and 10 cotton.) These
had increased to 60 cotton in 1819, and to 36 woolen. Flax cloth,
blended or unnamed cloths, and wool cloth,--all these made in
families,--amounted to a yearly valuation of $2,151,972; hempen cloth,
$12,148; stockings, $111,021; silks (sewing and raw), $28,503; hats to
the value of $522,200; straw bonnets, $25,100; shell, horn, and ivory
in manufactured products, $70,000. Looms for cotton numbered 16,132;
carding machines, 184; fulling mills, 213, and there were 11,883
spindles.
In iron, wood, and steel: 8 furnaces, with output of $46,180; 48
forges, $183,910; 2 rolling and slitting mills, 32 trip-hammers,
$91,146; 18 naileries, $27,092; 4 brass foundries, 1 type foundry,
brass jewelry, and plaited ware, $49,200; metal buttons, 155,000
gross, or $102,125; guns, rifles, etc., $49,050.
Among other manufactories and manufactures there were 408 tanneries,
$476,339; shoes, boots, etc., $231,812; the tin plate industry,
$139,370; 560 distilleries, $811,144; 18 paper mills, $82,188;
ropewalks, $243,950; carriages, $68,855, and the beginnings of
brick-making, glass-works, pottery, marble works, which, with the
state's 24 flaxseed mills and seven gunpowder mills, brought the sum
total to approximately $6,000,000.
Still the great impetus to manufacturing, which completely
revolutionized the character of the state, followed the Joint-stock
Act of 1837, with its consequent investment of capital and rush of
emigration, resulting in later days in a development of the cities at
the expense of the rural districts.
[m] Gilbert Brewster, the Arkwright of American cotton machinery, Eli
Whitney, with his cotton gin and rifle improvements, and John Fitch,
with his experiments with steam, are the most distinguished among a
host of men who made Yankee ingenuity and Yankee skill proverbial.
[n] "Era of Good Feeling, 1817-1829. The best principles of the
Federalists, the preservation and perpetuity of the Federal
government, had been quietly accepted by the Republicans, and the
Republican principle of limiting the powers and duties of the Federal
government had been adopted by the Federalists. The Republicans
deviated so far from their earlier strict construction views as in
1816 to charter a national bank for twenty years, and to model it upon
Hamilton's bank of 1791 which they had refused to re-charter in
1811,"--A. Johnson, _American Politics_, pp. 80, 81.
[o] "This was for the support of missions outside the state. The
Domestic or State Home Missionary Society undertook the buiding up of
places within the state that were without suitable religious care. The
former finally absorbed the latter when its original purpose was
accomplished. Then, there was the Litchfield County Foreign Mission
Society, founded in 1812, the _first _auxiliary of the American
Board, which began its career in 1810, and was incorporated the same
year that its youngest branch was organized."--Lyman Beecher,
_Autobiography_, i, 275, 287-88 and 291.
[p] Organized in New Haven in October, 1812, with Dr. Dwight as
chairman. Members of the committee upon organization included nearly
all the prominent men of that day, both of the clergy and of the
bar. A list is given in Lyman Beecher, _Autobiography_, i, 256.
[q] "We really broke up riding and working on the Sabbath, and got the
victory. The thing was done, and had it not been for the political
revolution that followed, it would have stood to this day.... The
efforts we made to execute the laws, and secure a reformation of
morals, reached the men of piety, and waked up the energies of the
whole state, so far as the members of our churches, and the
intelligent and moral portion of our congregation were
concerned. These, however, proved to be a minority of the suffrage of
the state."--Lyman Beecher, _Autobiography_, i, 268.
"In Pomfret the Justice of the Peace arrested and fined townspeople
who persisted in working on Sunday, and held travellers over until
Monday morning."--E. D. Lamed, _History of Windham_, ii, 448.
[r] "The odium thrown upon the ministry was inconceivable. ... The
Congregational ministers agreed to hold back and keep silent until the
storm blew over. Our duty as well as policy was explanation and
self-defence, expostulation and conciliation."--_Autobiography_,
i, 344.
[s] "Aristides," March 26, 1826, and "Episcopalian," March 13, issues
of the _American Mercury_.
"When the Episcopal Church petitioned the legislature in vain, as she
did for a series of years, for a charter to a college, he (the
Rev. Philo Shelton of Fairfield) with others of his brethren
_proposed a union with the political party, then in a minority_,
to secure what he regarded a just right. And the first fruit of the
union was the charter of Trinity (Washington) College, Hartford. He
was one of a small number of clergymen who decided on this measure,
and were instrumental in carrying it into effect; and it resulted in a
change in the politics of the State which has never yet been
reversed."--_Sprague's Annals of American Pulpit_ (Episcopal), v,
35.
[t] Total vote for governor 21,759. Mr. Goddard received 9421
votes.--J. H. Trumbull, _Hist. Notes_, p. 36.
[u] The law apportioned one third of the money to the
Congregationalists; one seventh to Yale; one seventh to the
Episcopalians; one eighth to the Baptists; one twelfth to the
Methodists, and the balance to the state treasury.--Cited in
_Connecticut Courant_, November 8, 1816. _Acts and Laws_,
pp. 279, 280.
[v] The first installment, $50,000, was paid into the Treasury in
June, 1817. The Methodists, and later the Baptists, accepted their
share, but not until political events had removed some of their
objections.
See the _Mirror_, February 16, 1818. It was not until 1820 that
the final acceptance of the money took place.
J. H. Trumbull, _Hist. Notes_, p. 36, foot-note, gives the
following figures. By November, 1817, $61,500 had been received and
apportioned: Congregationalists, $20,500.00; Trustees of the Bishop's
Fund, $8,785.71; Baptist Trustees, $7,687.50; Methodist Trustees,
$5,125.00; Yale College, $8,785.71, and a balance still unappropriated
of $10,616.08.
[w] Legal returns gave Wolcott 13,655
Smith 13,119
Scattering 202 13,321
------ ------
334
"The correction of errors increased the majority to 600, which the
Federalists conceded.--J. H. Trumbull, _Hist. Notes_, p. 38,
footnote.
[x] Governor Wolcott's speech, _Connecticut Courant_, May 20,
1817; also _Niles' Register_, xii, pp. 201-204.
[y] "In our climate, three fireplaces are occasionally necessary to
the comfortable accommodation of every family."--Governor's speech.
[z] Published 1795.
[aa] A vindication of the calling of the Special Superior Court at
Middletown... for the trial of Peter Lung... with observations, &c,
Windham, 1816.
[ab] The legislature had also interfered with decisions regarding the
Symsbury patent. See E. Kirby, _Law Reports,_ p. 446.
[ac] A summary of the Connecticut constitution, taken from _Niles's
Register,_ asserts that the General Court has sole power to make
and repeal laws, grant levies, dispose of lands belonging to the state
to particular towns and persons, to erect and style judicatories and
officers as they shall see necessary for the good government of the
people; also to call to account any court, magistrate, or other
officer for misdemeanor and maladministration, or for just cause may
fine, displace, or remove, them, or deal otherwise as the nature of
the ease shall require; and may deal or act in any other matter that
concerns the good of the state except the election of governor,
deputy-governor, assistants, treasurer and secretary, which shall be
done by the freemen at the yearly court of election, unless there be
any vacancy by reason of death or otherwise, after an election, when
it may be filled by the General Court. This court has power also, for
reasons satisfactory to them, to grant suspension, release, and jail
delivery upon reprieves in capital and criminal cases.
The elections for the assistants and superior officers are annual; for
the representatives, semi-annual. The sessions of the General Court
are semi-annual. The Governor and the speaker have the casting vote in
the Upper and Lower House, respectively.
The Superior Court consists of one chief judge and four others, and
holds two sessions in each county each year. Its jurisdiction holds
over all criminal cases extending to life, limb, or banishment; all
criminal cases brought from county courts by appeal or writ of error,
and in some matters of divorce.
The county court consists of one judge and four justices of the
quorum, with jurisdiction over all criminal cases not extending to
life, limb, or banishment, and with original jurisdiction in all civil
actions where the demand exceeds forty shillings. Justices of the
Peace, in the various towns, have charge of civil actions involving
less than forty shillings, and criminal jurisdiction in some cases,
where the fine does not exceed forty shillings, or the punishment
exceed ten stripes or sitting in the stocks. Judges and Justices are
annually appointed by the General Court, and commonly reappointed
during good behavior, while sheriffs are appointed by the governor and
council without time-limit and are subject to removal. Recently
county courts determined matters of equity involving from five pounds
to two hundred pounds, the Superior Court two hundred pounds to
sixteen hundred, and the General Assembly all others.
Probate districts, not coextensive with the counties, exist, with
appeal to the Superior Court.
In military matters, the governor is the captain-general of the
militia, and the General Court appoints the general officers and field
officers, and they are commissioned by the governor. Captains and
subalterns are chosen by the vote of the company and of the
householders living within the limits of the company, but must be
approved by the General Court and commissioned by the governor before
they can serve. All military officers hold their commissions during
the pleasure of the General Assembly and may not resign them without
permission, except under penalty of being reduced to the ranks.--
_Niles' Register,_ 1813, vol. iii, p. 443, etc. Corrected
slightly by reference to Swift's _System of Laws._
[ad] Banks and insurance companies began to organize about 1790 to
1810.
[ae] In 1818, for the first time, a dissenter, Mr. Croswell, rector of
Trinity Church, New Haven, preached the Election Sermon.
[af] Messrs. Pitkin, Todd, G. Lamed, Pettibone, and Wiley. Of these,
the first had been twenty times state representative, five times
speaker of the House, and for thirteen years had been representative
in Congress.
[ag] The first seven sections of the Bill of Bights according to the
final revision are:--
Sec. 1. That all men when they form a social compact, are equal in
rights; and that no man, or set of men are entitled to exclusive
public emoluments or privileges from the community.
Sec. 2. That all political power is inherent in the people, and
all free governments are founded on their authority, and
instituted for their benefit; and that they have, at all times, an
undeniable and indefeasible right to alter their form of
government, in such a manner as they may think expedient.
Sec. 3. The exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and
worship, without discrimination, shall forever be free to all
persons in this state; provided, that the right, hereby declared
and established, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of
licentiousness, or to justify practices inconsistent with the
peace and safety of the state.
Sec. 4. No preference shall be given by law to any Christian sect
or mode of worship.
Sec. 5. Every citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his
sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of
that liberty.
Sec. 6. No law shall ever be passed to curtail or restrain the
liberty of speech or of the press.
Sec. 7. In all prosecutions or indictments for libels, the truth
may be given in evidence; and the jury shall have the right to
determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court.
[ah] Mr. Trumbull asserts that "writers and historians are in error
when attributing to Mr. Morse of Suffield (the Baptist minister
aforementioned) the drafting of the Article on Religious Liberty. The
drafting committee were Messrs. Tomlinson and Stow, and the first
clause, as reported, seems to have been taken with slight alteration
from Governor Woleott's speech to the General Assembly, May, 1817,
namely, 'It is the right and duty of every man publicly and privately
to worship and adore the Supreme Creator and Preserver of the Universe
in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience.'"
--J. H. Trumbull, _Notes on the Constitution_, pp. 56, 57.
[ai] The second section remained unchanged.
[aj] Seven hundred copies were distributed among the towns.
[ak] By later amendments, judges of the Supreme Court of Errors and
the Superior Court are nominated by the governor and appointed by the
General Assembly. Judges of probate are now elected by the electors in
their respective districts; justices of the peace in the several towns
by the electors in said towns; and sheriffs by their counties.
[al] By amendment of 1901, the vote for governor, lieutenant-governor,
secretary, treasurer, comptroller, and attorney-general was changed
from a majority to a plurality vote, the Assembly to decide between
candidates, if at any time two or more should receive "an equal and
the greatest number" of votes.
[am] "It cut the churches loose from dependence upon state support--It
threw them wholly on their own resources and on God." "The mass is
changing," wrote Dr. Beecher. "We are becoming another people. The old
laws answered when all men in a parish were of one faith."--Lyman
Beecher, _Autobiography,_ i, pp. 344, 453.
[an] Lyman Beecher.
APPENDIX
NOTES
CHAPTER I. THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY CONGREGATIONALISM.
1, H. M. Dexter, Congregationalism as seen in Literature, p. 49.
2, Robert Browne, A True and Short Declaration, p. l.
3, H. M. Dexter, Congregationalism as seen in Literature, p. 70.
4, Report of Conference April 3, 1590, quoted in F. J. Powicke, Henry
Barrowe, p. 54.
5, W. Walker, Creeds and Platforms, p. 12.
6, Ibid., pp. 14, 15; also H. M. Dexter, Congregationalism as seen in
Literature, pp. 96-104.
7, Robert Browne, A Treatise on Reformation without Tarrying, pp. 4,
7,12.
8, Robert Browne, A True and Short Declaration, p. 7; Book which
Sheweth, pp. 117-148.
9, Robert Browne, Book which Sheweth, Questions 55-58.
10, Ibid., Def. 35-40; Henry Barrowe, Discovery of False Churches,
p. 34, and The True Description in Appendix IV of F. J. Powicke's
Henry Barrowe.
11, Robert Browne, Book which Sheweth, Def. 53 and 54.
12, Henry Barrowe, Discovery of False Churches, p. 48.
13, Henry Barrowe, Discovery of False Churches, pp. 166, 275; Robert
Browne, Book which Sheweth, Def. 51; A True and Short Declaration,
p. 20; The True Confession of Faith, Article 38.
14, H. M. Dexter, Congregationalism as seen in Literature, pp. 221,
232; also John Brown, Pilgrim Fathers of New England, pp. 22-25.
15, The True Confession, Art. 39.
16, "The Seven Articles," of which the following is the text:--
(1) "To ye confession of fayth published in ye name of ye Church
of England and to every artikell thereof wee do w'th ye reformed
churches wheer wee live & also els where assent wholly.".
(2) "And as wee do acknowlidg ye doctryne of fayth theer tawght so
do wee ye fruites and effeckts of ye same docktryne to ye
begetting of saving fayth in thousands in ye land (conformistes &
reformistes) as ye ar called w'th whom also as w'th our brethren
wee do desyer to keepe speirtuall communion in peace and will
pracktis in our parts all lawful thinges."
(3) "The King's Majesty wee acknowlidg for Supreme Governor in his
dominion in all causes, and over all parsons [persons] and ye none
maye decklyne or apeale his authority or judgment in any cause
whatsoever, but ye in all thinges obedience is dewe unto him,
either active, if ye thing commanded be not against God's woord,
or passive yf itt bee, except pardon can bee obtayned."
(4) "Wee judge itt lawfull for his Majesty to apoynt bishops,
civill overseers, or officers in awthoryty onder hime in ye
severall provinces, dioses, congregations or parishes, to oversee
ye churches, and governe them civilly according to ye Lawes of ye
Land, uutto whom ye ar in all thinges to geve an account and by
them to bee ordered according to Godlyness." (This is not an
acknowledgment of spiritual--superiority or authority, only the
recognition that as church officers were also magistrates, the
king could appoint them as his civil servants.)
(5) "The authority of ye present bishops in ye land wee do
acknowlidg so far forth as ye same is indeed derived from his
Majesty untto them and as ye proseed in his name, whom wee will
also therein honor in all thinges and hime in them."
(6) "Wee believe ye no sinod, classes, convocation or assembly of
Ecclesiastical Officers hath any power or awthority att all but ye
same by ye Majestraet given unto them." (Intended to be a denial
of Presbyterianism.)
(7) "Lastly wee desyer to geve untto all Superiors dew honour to
preserve ye unity of ye spiritt w'th all ye feare God to have
peace w'th all men what in us lyeth and wherein wee err to bee
instructed by any." (Text of Points of Difference and Seven
Articles in W. Walker, Creeds and Platforms, pp. 75-93.)
CHAPTER II. THE TRANSPLANTING OF CONGREGATIONALISM.
17, The Commons prayed, "that no man hereafter be compelled to make or
yield any gift, loan, benevolence, tax, or such like charge, without
common consent by Act of Parliament. And that none be called to make
answer, or to take such oaths, or to be confined or otherwise molested
or disputed concerning the same, or for refusal thereof. And that no
freeman may in such manner as is before mentioned be imprisoned or
detained."--Extract from the Petition of Right. See J. R. Green, Short
History of the English People, pp 486, 487.
18, E. H. Byington, The Puritan in England and New England, pp. 486,
487.
19, See Gott's Letter in Bradford's Letter-Book, Mass. Hist. Soc.,
iii, 67,68.
20, G. L. Walker, History of the First Church in Hartford, p. 154.
CHAPTER III. CHURCH AND STATE IN NEW ENGLAND.
21, Thomas Hooker, Survey of Church Discipline, chap. 3, p. 75; also
Mass. Col. Rec., iii, 424; J. Cotton, Way of the Churches, pp. 6, 7.
22, J. Cotton, Way of the Churches, pp. 6, 7; Plymouth Col. Rec., ii,
67; Mass. Col. Rec., i, 216, iii, 354; Hartford Town Voter, in
Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi, 32; Conn. Col. Rec., i, 311, 545.
23, Plymouth Col. Laws, ed. 1836, p. 258; Conn. Col. Rec., i, pp. 96,
138, 290, 331, 389, 525.
24, J. Cotton, A Discourse about Civil Government in a New Plantation
whose Design is Religion (written many years since), London, 1643,
pp. 12, 19. (This is a misprint in the title-page, for the author was
John Davenport.)
25, Mass. Col. Rec., i, 87.
26, J. Cotton, Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, pp. 50, 53.
27, Mass. Law of 1636; Conn. Col. Rec., i, 341.
28, Conn. Col. Rec., i, 525.
29, G. F. Ellis, Puritan Age in Massachusetts, p. 34.
30, Winthrop, i, 81.
31, Mass. Col. Rec., i, 142.
32, Winthrop, i, 287; H. M. Dexter, Ecclesiastical Councils of New
England, p. 31.
33, J. A. Doyle, Puritan Colonies, ii, 70.
CHAPTER IV. THE CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM AND THE HALF-WAY COVENANT.
34, C. Mather, Magnalia, ii, 277.
35, Horace Bushnell, in Discourse on Christian Nurture, p. 25.
36, Cotton Mather, Magnalia, ii, 179.
37, Results of Half-Way Covenant Convention, Prop. 4. See W. Walker,
Creeds and Platforms, p. 296.
38, W. Walker, Creeds and Platforms, p. 295. See Question 7, of
Results.
39, Conn. Col. Rec., i, 386, 426.
40, Conn. State Papers (Ecclesiastical), vol. i, Doc. 106. Quoted in
the Church Review and Ecclesiastical Register, x, p. 116.
41, Beardsley, Hist, of the Church in Connecticut, i, 101; Perry,
Hist, of Epis. Church in the United States, i, 283, 284.
42, Conn. Col. Rec., i, 437, 438.
43, G. L. Walker, Hist, of First Church in Hartford, p. 200.
44, Record of the United Colonies, i, 506.
45, G. L. Walker, Hist, of First Church in Hartford, p. 209.
46, L. Bacon, Coatr. to Eccl. Hist, of Connecticut, p. 29.
47, E. Stiles, Christian Union, p. 85; J. A. Doyle, Puritan Colonies,
ii, 69; Conn. Col. Rec., i, 545; ii, 290 and 557.
48, Conn. Col. Rec., vii, 33; viii, 74.
CHAPTER V. A PERIOD OF TRANSITION.
49, Thomas Prince, Christian History, i, 94.
50, Preface to Work of the Reforming Synod.
51, C. Mather, Magnalia, Book v, p. 40.
52, C. Mather, Ratio Discipline, p. 17.
53, C. M. Andrews, Three River Towns, p. 86. See also Bronson, Early
Government, in New Haven Hist. Soc. Papers, iii, 315;
Conn. Col. Rec., 290-293, 321, 354.
54, Conn. Col. Rec., v, 67.
55, L. Bacon, Contr. to Ecel. History, p. 33.
56, Conn. Col. Rec., v, 87.
CHAPTER VI. THE SAYBROOK PLATFORM.
57, Saybrook Platform.
58, L. Bacon, Thirteen Historical Discourses, pp. 190, 191.
59, S. Stoddard, Instituted Churches, p. 29.
60, Trumbull, Hist, of Connecticut, i, 406; T. Clap, Hist, of Yale
College, p. 30.
61, Trumbull, Hist, of Connecticut, i, 406.
62, L. Bacon, Thirteen Historical Discourses, p. 190.
63, H. M. Dexter, Congregationalism as seen in Literature, pp. 489,
490.
64, Conn. Col. Rec., v, 87.
65, Ibid., v, 50.
66, A. Johnston, Connecticut, p. 232.
CHAPTER VII. THE SAYBROOK PLATFORM AND THE TOLERATION ACT.
67, John Bolles, A Relation of the Opposition some Baptist People met
at Norwich in 1761.
68, Ibid., p. 7.
69, Quaker Laws. The New Haven Laws against Quakers deal thus
fiercely:--
"_Whereas_ there is a cursed sect of heretics lately risen up
in the world, which are commonly called Quakers, who take upon
them that they are immediately sent of God and infallibly assisted
by his spirit, who yet write and speak blasphemous opinions,
despise governments and the order of God, in church and
commonwealth... we do hereby order and declare
"That whosoever shall hereafter bring, or cause to be brought,
directly or indirectly, any known Quaker or Quakers, or other
blasphemous heretics, into this jurisdiction, every such person
shall forfeit the sum of 600 pounds to the jurisdiction, except it
appear that he wanted true knowledge or information of their being
such... and it is hereby ordered that what Quaker or Quakers
soever come into this jurisdiction, from foreign parts or places
adjacent, if it be about their civil, lawful occasions to be
quickly despatched among us, which time of stay shall be limited
by the civil authority in each plantation, and that they shall not
use any means by words, writings, books, or any other way, to go
about to seduce others, nor revile nor reproach, nor any other way
make disturbance or offend. They shall upon their first arrival,
or coming in, appear to be brought before the authorities of the
place and from them have license to put about and issue their
lawful occasions, and shall have one or more to attend upon them
at their charge until such occasions of theirs be discharged, and
they return out of the jurisdiction which if they refuse to do,
they shall be denied such free passage and commerce and be caused
to return back again, but if this first time they shall offend in
any of the ways as before expressed, and contrary to the intent of
this law, they shall be committed to prison, severely whipped,
kept to work, and none suffered to converse with them during their
imprisonment, which shall be no longer than necessity requires,
and at their own charge sent out of the jurisdiction."
For a second offense, they were to be branded, as well as to be
committed to prison. For a fourth offense, they were to have their
tongues bored through with hot irons. Their books, papers, etc., were
to subject their possessors to a fine of 5 pounds, and entertaining or
concealing a Quaker was to be punished by a fine of 20s.; while
undertaking to defend any of their heretical opinions was doubly
fined.--New Haven Col. Kec., ii, 217, 238,363.
In 1656, the Connecticut Court, in conformity to a suggestion from the
commissioners of the United Colonies, ordered that "no towne within
this jurisdiction shall entertaine any Quakers, Kanters, Adamites, or
such notorious heretiques, or suffer them to continue with them above
the space of fourteen days,... and shall give notice to the two next
towns to send them on their way under penalty of L5 per week for any
town entertaining any such person, nor shall any master of a ship land
such or any." In August, 1657, the above fine was imposed on the
individual who entertained the Quaker, etc., as well as on the town,
and an officer was appointed to examine suspects. A little later, a
penalty of 10s. was imposed for Quaker books and MSS. found in the
possession of any but a teaching elder. Twice the Court saw fit to
leave, notwithstanding all former orders, all such cases to the
jurisdiction of the separate towns, to order fines, banishment, or
corporal punishment, provided the fines "exceed not ten pounds."
The tone is brief and businesslike, dealing with a matter that had
already caused great trouble to the other United Colonies, and which
might become a menace to Connecticut. There are almost no recorded
cases of sentence being imposed. See Conn. Col. Kec., i, 283,303,308,
324.
70, J. Bowden, History of the Society of Friends, i, 104, quoting
Norton's Ensign, p. 52.
71, Ibid., i, 106.
72, Ibid., i, 440.
73, R. P. Hallowell, The Pioneer Quakers, p. 47.
74, R. R. Hinman, Antiquities of the Charter Government of
Connecticut, p. 229.
75, E. E. Beardsley, History of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut,
i, 19.
76, A. L. Cross, Anglican Episcopate in the American Colonies, pp. 33
et seq.
77, Ibid., p. 95, note.
78, C. F. Hawkins, Missions of the Church of England, 377, 378.
79, Church Documents, Conn., i, 14.
80, Ibid., i, 59.
81, Ibid., i, 136.
CHAPTER VIII. THE FIRST VICTORY FOR DISSENT.
82, Church Documents, Conn., i, 153.
83, Ibid., i, 56.
84, S. D. McConnell, History of the American Episcopal Church, p. 132.
85, Conn. Col. Rec., viii, 106; and Church Documents, Conn., i, 280,
283.
86, Conn. Col. Rec., vii, 459, and viii, 123, 334.
87, Rogerine Laws. See Conn. Col. Rec., v. 248, 249.
88, C. W. Bowen, The Boundary Disputes of Connecticut, especially
pp. 48, 58, and 74.
89, The Talcott Papers, published in vols. iv and v of the
Conn. Hist. Soc. Collections.
90, Conn. Col. Rec., iv, 307.
91, Talcott Papers, i, 147, 189, and ii, 245, 246, in
Conn. Hist. Soc. Collections, vols. iv and v.
92, C. M. Andrews, The Connecticut Intestacy Law, in Yale Review, iii,
261 et seq.
93, Conn. Col. Rec., vii, 237.
94, Ibid., vii, 257.
CHAPTER IX. THE GREAT AWAKENING.
95, Jonathan Edwards' Works, iv, 306-324.
96, Ibid., iv, 81.
97, Lauer, Church and State, p. 77; also Conn. Col. Rec., vi, 33.
98, A. Johnston, Hist, of Conn., pp. 255, 256; also H. Bronson,
Historical Account of Conn. Currency, in New Haven Hist. Soc. Papers,
i, 51 et seq.
99, Joseph Tracy, The Great Awakening, p. 13.
100, Edwards' Works, iv, 34-37.
CHAPTER X. THE GREAT SCHISM.
101, Conn. Col. Rec., vii, 309.
102, Ibid., viii, 522.
103, Charles Chauncy, Seasonable Thoughts, p. 249.
104, Conn. Col. Rec., viii, 438, 468; also Joseph Tracy, The Great
Awakening, p. 303.
105, Conn. Col. Rec., viii, 454 et seq.; B. Trumbull, Hist, of
Connecticut, ii, 165; C. Chauncy, Seasonable Thoughts, p. 41.
106, Conn. Col. Rec., viii, 456.
107, Ibid., viii, 456.
108, Ibid., viii, 457.
109, Trumbull, Hist, of Conn., ii, 135.
110, S. W. S. Button, Hist, of the North Church in New Haven.
111, E. D. Lamed, Hist, of Windham County, vol. ii, book 5, chapter
3.
112, O. W. Means, Hist, of the Enfleld Separate Church.
113, Conn. Col. Rec., October, 1751.
114, E. D. Lamed, Hist, of Windham County, vol. ii, book 5, chapter
3.
115, Conn. Col. Rec., viii, 501.
116, Ibid., viii, 502.
117, E. D. Larned, Hist, of Windham County, ii, 417, 419, 425, 426;
L. Bacon, Thirteen Historical Discourses, p. 245.
118, Solomon Paine's View, pp. 15, 16.
119, Thomas Clap, History of Yale, p. 27.
120, G. P. Fisher, Church of Christ in Yale College, app. 6.
121, E. D. Lamed, History of Windham County, i, 425, 426.
122, S. L. Blake, The Separatists, pp. 183, 192. (This book gives the
origin and end of every Separate church.) Also 0. W. Means, History of
the Enfield Separate Church.
123, Conn. Col. Rec., xii, 269, 341.
124, Ibid., viii, 507.
125, Trumbull, History of Connecticut, i, 132, 133.
126, W. C. Reichel, Dedication of Monuments erected by the Moravian
Historical Societies in New York and Connecticut.
G. H. Loskiel, Hist, of Missions of the United Brethren among the
Indians of North America. J. Heckwelder, Missions of the United
Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians, pp. 51 et seq.
127, Conn. Col. Rec., ix, 218.
128, I. Backus, History of the Baptists, ii, 80.
129, H. M. Dexter, Congregationalism as seen in Literature, p. 503.
CHAPTER XI. THE ABROGATION OF THE SAYBROOK PLATFORM.
130, Frederick Dennison, Notes of the Baptists and their Principles in
Norwich, Conn., p. 10.
131, Ibid., p. 16.
132, Stiles, Ancient Windsor, p. 439.
133, C. H. S. Davis, Hist, of Wallingford, pp. 164-210.
134, "To the King's Most Excellent Majesty in Council." (Quoted in
Frederick Dennison, Notes of the Baptists.)
135, T. Clap, History of Yale, pp. 41-60.
136, Quoted by E. H. Gillett, Civil Liberty in Connecticut, Historical
Magazine, 2d series, vol. iv.
137, E. D. Lamed, History of Windham County, i, 468.
138, Thomas Darling, Some Remarks, p. 6.
139, Ibid., p. 41.
140, Ibid., pp. 43, 46.
141, Robert Ross, Plain Address, p. 54.
142, E. Frothingham, Key to Unlock, p. 147.
143, Ibid., pp. 56, 58.
144, Ibid., pp. 51-53.
145, Ibid., p. 42.
146, Ibid., p. 156.
147, Ibid., p. 181.
148, Loomis and Calhoun, Judicial and Civil History of Connecticut,
p. 55.
149, M. C. Tyler, Literary History of the American Revolution, i, 133.
150, Fulham, MSS. cited in A, L. Cross, Anglican Episcopate in the
American Colonies, p. 115. See also pp. 122 et seq. and 332, 345.
151, A. L. Cross, Anglican Episcopate, pp. 164 and 216. Perry,
American Episcopal Church, i, 415.
Back to Full Books
|